An Open Letter to the ASU+GSV Summit Committee: Who Does Your North Star Truly Guide?
Every year, the ASU+GSV Summit brings together some of the brightest minds in education, technology, and venture capital—a collision of ideas meant to “transform society and business around learning and work.” The event’s mission statement proudly declares a commitment to equity, innovation, and global progress. But as the summit evolves, so do the questions about its priorities. Who, exactly, is this “North Star” guiding? Is it the marginalized communities your rhetoric champions, or the powerful institutions that dominate the stage?
Let’s start by acknowledging the good. The summit has undeniably amplified critical conversations about bridging gaps in education, workforce development, and access to opportunity. Panels on AI in classrooms, upskilling for underrepresented groups, and reimagining credentialing have sparked meaningful dialogue. Yet, beneath the polished keynotes and networking receptions lies a tension that’s hard to ignore: the disconnect between the summit’s aspirational language and the lived realities of those it claims to serve.
The Paradox of “Equity” in Elite Spaces
ASU+GSV’s emphasis on equity is both admirable and paradoxical. While sessions highlight the need to uplift underserved populations, the summit’s exclusivity often contradicts this goal. Ticket prices hover around $2,000, with sponsorship packages reaching six figures—a barrier that inherently limits participation to those already entrenched in privilege. How can a conference dedicated to “democratizing education” justify pricing out educators from underfunded public schools or nonprofit leaders working in low-income communities?
This isn’t just about cost. It’s about visibility. The most celebrated speakers—CEOs, Ivy League administrators, and Silicon Valley investors—rarely reflect the diversity of the communities impacted by their decisions. When a panel on “the future of urban education” features no voices from actual urban classrooms, or a discussion on edtech in Africa centers Western founders, the message becomes clear: equity is a talking point, not a practice.
Venture Capital’s Shadow Over Mission-Driven Work
The summit’s partnership with GSV Ventures, a firm managing billions in edtech investments, further complicates its identity. Venture capital isn’t inherently bad—it fuels innovation. But when profit motives overshadow social impact, priorities shift. Startups pitching at ASU+GSV often focus on scalable, marketable solutions rather than systemic change. For example, AI tutoring tools might earn applause for their efficiency, but they sidestep deeper issues like teacher shortages or crumbling school infrastructure.
Worse, the venture mindset risks commodifying education itself. When investors ask, “What’s your growth model?” instead of “Who does this leave behind?” we reinforce a system where outcomes are measured in dollars, not lives improved. Consider this: Less than 3% of venture funding in edtech goes to founders of color, yet panels on “diversity in innovation” rarely address this disparity. If the summit’s North Star is equity, why isn’t it holding its own network accountable?
A Call for Radical Transparency and Inclusion
So, what would it look like to realign the summit’s compass? First, transparency. Publish demographic data on speakers, attendees, and funded startups. Acknowledge where representation falls short and set measurable goals. Second, redistribute access. Offer free or subsidized tickets to grassroots organizers, teachers, and students. Partner with local communities to co-create sessions that address their needs, not just investor interests.
Third, redefine success. Instead of celebrating billion-dollar valuations, spotlight initiatives that prioritize impact over scale. Highlight community colleges partnering with employers to design free certification programs. Amplify nonprofits using low-tech solutions to bridge digital divides. These stories may lack Silicon Valley glamour, but they’re the ones reshaping lives.
The North Star Isn’t a Marketing Tool—It’s a Mandate
The ASU+GSV Summit has the influence and resources to drive real change. But influence without accountability is just performance. If the committee truly believes in its mission, it must confront uncomfortable truths: Who benefits from the current structure? Whose voices are missing? And what systemic inequities is the summit inadvertently perpetuating?
This isn’t about shaming; it’s about challenging a beloved institution to grow. The North Star isn’t static—it demands constant course correction. Let’s see less self-congratulation and more humility. Less performative allyship and more tangible action. The world doesn’t need another echo chamber for the elite. It needs a summit that lives its values, even when it’s inconvenient.
So, to the ASU+GSV Committee: The spotlight is on you. Will you recalibrate your compass to guide those who need it most, or will the North Star remain a distant symbol—visible to all but meaningful to few? The choice will define not just the future of the summit, but the credibility of its mission.
Please indicate: Thinking In Educating » An Open Letter to the ASU+GSV Summit Committee: Who Does Your North Star Truly Guide